Links

Linda and David Story

Linda and David love each other very much and wish to see each other. But they have a problem. A wide river separates them, David on one side and Linda on the other.

Steven owns the one and only boat that is capable of crossing the river. Linda goes to him and tells of her plight. She asks Steven if he will take her across the river in h is boat so she can see her love. He says that he is willing, but only if she will sleep with him. Initially, Linda says no, however, later seeing no alternative, she consents.

When Linda arrives at David’s house, she is wracked with guilt, so she tells him all that has happened. He becomes enraged and throws Linda out of the house.

Linda happens to have a very good friend who also lives on that side of the river and goes to that friend for help, but the friend says, “I’m sorry but I don’t want to get involved,” and sends Linda on her way.

Finally, Linda tells an acquaintance, Michael, what has happened. He gets angry and returns to David’s house with Linda. Michael gives David a sound beating.

Great podcast. Many good points on the topics you covered, but there were some points that felt were missed. No one could really define what love is. For me, the best way to describe love is a set of switches, everybody has them, but they vary in what those switches are. When we meet people, get to know them, become attracted, etc., those switches are being flipped on. When enough switches are ‘on’, love is lit. Like a fuse box, some things can cause switches to shut off. I think that’s where the complexity of compatibility comes into play. Some couples don’t have enough switches on, but they’re the same switches (things in common) so they assume it’s a relationship that should work. Other relationships, switches are unbalanced (one has more feelings than the other). In strong, long lasting relationships, switches aren’t easily shut off (fights), they don’t have to match (likes and hobbies), and the other person’s switches are to be respected, accepted, and not attempted to be altered.

Now to assume there’s only one person in the world and in one owns’ existence that can cause such switches to be turned on is mind boggling. Switches are robotic in they mostly don’t care about monogamy because they only process preference. For most people, switches are possessiveness and exclusivity, which is where insecurities and jealousy arise, and it’s an area where relationships are at risk for breaking up. I’d love to know the number of long lasting couples that have overcame infidelity. I really doubt half of marriages that last are the ones that don’t cheat. A strong relationship can overcome lust. My close friend loves her man, has for a decade, about to get married, but once in a while she has a quick fling. Complete unattached company that she makes clear to the other person, will go no where. Regardless if I agree with it or not, I’m not going to be the friend that tells her how she should run her life. I think she does it because her man isn’t really much of a man in bed, but she still loves him as a whole; most of her switches are on for him, a flicker in their fuse box won’t change that. A strong and secured person also shouldn’t have to burden their partner with honesty because the partner can’t keep a switch lit.

The most difficult situation is when one has to choose a similar overall lit set of switches between two people. We live in a society where people prefer or demand exclusivity and loving more than one person is forbidden, unacceptable, incomprehensible. and in some places, illegal (polygamy). It’s an all or nothing kind of nation and those people ultimately have to choose with hesitancy because of the feeling of a high opportunity cost (missing out). This is why ‘All’s fair in love & war’.

(Sorry for an article of a comment, but it’s not often you hear men open up about their feelings ;)

I like your “set of switches” model of love. It’s a nice structured way to think about it. I’ll have to think about your statement that “a strong and secured person also shouldn’t have to burden their partner with honesty because the partner can’t keep a switch lit.” I like that. Honesty is something I’ve been thinking about a lot lately. On one hand it’s essential for developing character, on the other hand it can in fact be something that does more harm than good.

Most BJJ people assume that judo and BJJ are set up similarly for competion. Whenever I mention to BJJ people there are no belt divisions in most judo tournaments, they are amazed and believe it is totally unfair. I guess if you are looking to maximize tournament participation/business, breaking divisions up by belt is a good idea. However, the process of getting crushed in competition to eventually winning competitions, also has a charactor building component. My guess is that judo/wrestling competitors are likely more in-tuned with being both the hammer and the nail.

Well put. Wrestlers and judoka go through the long process of being the nail at several stages in their career. For BJJ folks the transition is more gradual. I don’t know what’s better in terms of making a better competitior, but I do know that the wrestling way molds character like nothing else.